I am sure most of you all have heard that over the past few weeks the market has been closing at record highs.

I know a small bit about the economy, but was wondering your opinions on a couple things.

Do you think that this is a result of/directly linked to the Bush Administration or is it residual effects of administrations past?

Does it relate to "tax cuts" that are promoted so intensely by repubs?

I have heard a handful of financial folks on NPR and such talk about how it is sort of an illusion and often times means a recession/drastic drop in the system is on the verge. Is this a real possibility? If so, how does that come in to play?

I think there is another question I had about it, but generally, is this a good thing or a more likely than not bad thing?

ever heard of inflation?

http://www.cbpp.org/10-5-06bud.htm

It's got lots to do with crude closing below $60 per barrel. The market remarkably treaded water while oil spiked, now that it's back down, the economy is cooking again. Look for gold to plummet.

And by the economy, you mean the economy that rich people with extra money can invest in right?

That's interesting. I would have guess inflation would have been a rather simplistic answer. Why, then, is it being broadcast so heavily throughout the media?

It seems like something they would ignore or pass off as the republicans cheating the numbers due to the upcoming election, etc.

because the media is LAZY. monkey see number, monkey write number. they have to "balance" all the bad news from iraq with this so the repubs dont attack 'em or pull their ad $.

haha. monkeys are funny.

That same economy in which all your blue collar pension funds are invested. Rising tide...all boats... dyadada dadada.

Yeah, the economy news really isn't that great. I believe that September also had a rather substantial increase in job layoffs and people applying for unemployment benefits. That might be all the seasonal farm laborers and construction workers, but it kind of tempers any good stock news.

This isn't just reserved for market/econ news either. It also applies to science, medicine and just about everything else.

I'm also just stupid enough to think the economy isn't all that bad, nor has it been for a while.

I know it's popular to think the Bush Administration is the most imcompetent leadership group ever and maybe they are. However I tend to buy into the theory that every administration whether Democrat or Republican has strengths and weaknesses that have nothing to do with party ideaology. While forgien policy has been dissmal, I really don't have complaints about how the administration has handled the economy asided from over spending. All things considered, it's been a fairly prosperous time. The next administration will probably have to balance out some stuff like bolstering the middle class but overall I'm pleased with the way it's been handled.

I don't disagree with your position (especially overspending), but I don't think Bush had anymore to do with the economy than Clinton did.

It's hard to figure out exactly who drives the economy and you can make several arguments either way because it's a combination of alot of things. It's like the QB, he's not as important as everyone thinks he is to winning but he gets the credit and the blame. So whatever.





Damn offensive line never gets any respect.

I agree, I tend to believe that Bush lucked into alot of things in the last year or two to have the economy rebound after seeing alot of setbacks for the economy during his first term. I think the economy continues to grow inspite of the administration and government right now, whereas in the early 90's I think the economic boom had alot to do with the government moving out of the way and assisting the economy in any way possible.

So basically when your guys are in office, it's to their credit and when they're out, it's luck. Don't buy it.

Exactly. If it's a loss of two, "Come on line, ya gotta block". Break a 45 yard TD, "Great Run!".

Oh jeez. I'm with the Kangfish, again.

In the same way, couldn't that be blamed on the previous administration?

no offense but Promethium's statment was ridiculous

That wasn't what I was really implying or trying to say, I personally credit a mixed government in the early 90's for the success rather than a one party system. In the 80's the mixed party system with the Dems controlling Congress was arguably worse than the current system. I just happen to think that the Democratic President with a Republican Congress more concerned with fiscal responsibility than a war on terror did a decent job of managing an economic boom while still watching out for the little guy a little bit.

Even if it's proven that the current administration has minimal impact on the current ecomony, how can one shift the American public out of the "Am I better off now than I was four years ago" voting mentality?

I tend to think that presidents typically affect the economy less than we give them credit for. If anything, the Fed and other outside sources weigh more heavily on the strength of the economy.

That being said, the Bush Administration's policy of giving huge tax breaks to the very wealthy and then hemorrhaging money on this war will hurt the economy in the long run. Racking up a decific during a time of relative economic prosperity does not bode well for our future in the case of a downturn in the economy.

just you wait until the chinese really turn the screws and start making you americans pay back your massive debt.

Unfortantely our massive debt to China is based on interdepence of us importing all their goods. So don't hold your breath. And the dollar is still consider pretty resillent despite the losses it's taken in the last two years, so if China doesn't feed our debt, somebody else will.

The funny thing is that the powers that be actually are pretty happy with the dollar staying relatively weak, seeing as it boosts our exports, thereby increasing our GDP. I know any administration would say it supports a strong dollar, there's just not enough incentive to take action to make it stronger.